Knowledge comes from Reason
alone.The objects of knowledge can be
known with certainty.

Four relations that can be
known with certainty:resemblance,
contrariety, degrees in quality, and proportions in quantity or number.

[Hume discusses certainty in
T1.3.3.2.]

Three relations that cannot
be known with certainty, because they depend on experience:contiguity in time and space, identity, and
causation.

Two modes of knowledge:Intuition and demonstration.

Knowledge
of relations that depend entirely on the ideas.Includes algebra and arithmetic, but not geometry.Why not geometry?[Like Kant, Hume thought that diagrams were
an essential part of geometric reasoning.]

What is the source of
mathematical and geometric ideas?

Section 2.Belief is
probable.

Probable
belief of contingent relations.

Probable belief depends on
experience.Three contingent
relations:identity, contiguity in time
and place, and causation.

Only causal reasoning can
take us beyond present impressions.Why?If we infer identity over
time or contiguity in space over time, the inference is causal.Why?

The Idea of
Causation.

Is it a simple idea?How does Hume show that it is not?

So it is a complex idea.In this section Hume identifies three simpler
ideas as elements of the complex idea:(1)
the idea of contiguity in time and space [this seems like two ideas]; (2) the
idea of temporal priority; and (3) the idea of necessary connection.

(1) contiguity
in time and space:Causes must be
temporally and spatially contiguous to their effects [No action at a distance.]

(2) temporal
priority [succession].What is Hume’s
argument for this condition.

(3) What is the source of the
idea of a necessary connection?

Hume considers the possibility that the idea of cause is an
exception to the Copy Principle.However, he asks us to wait until he has fully explained causal
inference.He will explain the idea of
necessary connection on the basis of his explanation of causal inference.

Section 3.The Principle
of Universal Causation:

Whatever begins to exist has
a cause of its existence.

Hume’s goal is to show that
the principle could not be known with certainty by reason.

First, it is not intuitively
certain.

Second, it cannot be
demonstrated from what is intuitively certain.

What is Hume’s argument?It depends on the imagination.How would an opponent reply?

What does Hume say about the
following proposition:

Every effect has a cause?

Section 4.Causal
reasoning:reasoning concerning cause
and effect.

How can the mind reason about
cause and effect, if causes cannot be determined by Reason?

To maintain the distinction
between knowledge and belief, we will distinguish Reasoning [with a capital
‘R’] from reasoning [with a small ‘r’].

Causal reasoning depends on
impressions or “ideas of memory, which are equivalent to impressions”[T 1.3.4.1].

Kinds of causal reasoning:

(1) from
a cause to an effect.

The example
of our knowledge of the death of Caesar.

Section 5.The role of perceptions and memory in causal reasoning.

Note:We can use coherence considerations to
determine what is true and false.Impressions and memories cohere together.This is the basis of causal inference.

What is the difference
between ideas of memory and ideas of the imagination?

The key idea:there is a difference in feeling.(This is the clue to solving the problem of
necessity.)

It is also the solution to
the distinction between belief and imagination.Force and liveliness.

Section 6.Causal
inference:from a cause (impression of
sensation or memory) to an effect (idea).

Why can causal relations not
be known intuitively?

What is the alternative?

Key:"the necessary connection depends on the
inference, instead of the inference's depending on the necessary
connection"[T 1.3.6.4]It will not be until the end of section 8 that we will be able to
explain what he means.

The example
of flame and heat.

What do we observe?(1) contiguity in
time and space; (2) temporalpriority;
and a new element:(3) constant
conjunction [in the past].

The problem:How to infer a future effect from a present cause on the basis of (1)-(3).

Could causal relations be
known deductively?

Answer:Yes, if Reason could produce the missing
premise:(UN = Uniformity of Nature)
“Instances, of which we have had no experience, must resemble those, of which
we have had experience, and that the course of nature continues always
uniformly the same”[T 1.3.6.4]

Could this premise be known
intuitively?Deductively?

What is the only alternative?

That UC is the result of
causal reasoning!But then causal
reasoning would be circular.Consider
the following argument:

Premise:In the past, like causes have produced like
effects.

Missing Premise:

___________________________________________

Conclusion:(UN) In the future, like causes will produce
like effects.

What is the missing premise?

The solution to the
explanation of causal inference:

It is not a form of Reasoning
[with a capital ‘R’], but of reasoning [with a small ‘r’]in
which imagination takes us from the idea of the cause to the idea of the effect
by a principle of transition from impressions (including “impressions” of
memory) to belief.

What example does Hume use to
illustrate the transition?

What is the principle that
explains the transition?Hume will
answer that question in the next section.

Section 7.Belief

Knowledge is certain.It carries absolute necessity.

The negation of knowledge is
absurd.It cannot even be thought.

[Is this true?]

Belief concerns what is
contingent. [Neither it nor its negation are necessary.]

The difference between belief
and incredulity in an idea is the manner of our conceiving the idea.

Three Accounts of Belief =
(1) lively idea related or associated with a present impression (including the
“impressions” of memory).

(2) lively idea produc’d by a relation to a
present impression (including “impressions” of memory)

(3) an idea + a feeling

The feeling gives beliefs
“more force and influence; makes them appear of greater importance; infixes them in
the mind; and renders then the governing principles of all our actions” [T
1.3.7.7]

Hume tests his account by
comparing history with literature.Is
what he says about them true?

What explains the transition
from cause to effect?“Custom or a
principle of association”[T 1.3.7.6]

Note:In footnote 20 on p. 67, Hume acknowledges
that causal reasoning can go in reverse, from the effect to the cause.How would that be possible on Hume’s account?

Section 8.The Causes of Belief

The Transmission Principle
[Hume’s second causal principle]:“When
any impression becomes present to us, it not only transports the mind to such
ideas as are related to it, but likewise communicates to them a share of its
force and vivacity”[T1.3.8.2]

The three kinds of
transition:

(1) resemblance:the example of the photo of a friend.

(2) contiguity
in time and space:thinking of home.

(3) causation.

How can an impression of a
cause lead us to infer its effect?

What is responsible for the
transition?Custom.

“Thus all probable reasoning
[with a small ‘r’] is nothing but a species of sensation”[T
1.3.8.12]What does Hume mean?

In paragraph 13, Hume
explains how memory can be involved in causal reasoning without our being aware
of it—by “secret operation, without being once thought of”.

IMPORTANT QUESTION:Call causes of which we are not aware, hidden causes. A secret operation would involve a hidden cause.On Hume’s account of causal reasoning, could
we ever come to believe in a hidden cause?

Paragraph 14:What is Hume’s explanation of inference from
a single case?

Paragraphs 15-16:Hume explains how we can have the memory of
having an idea. What is the puzzle that he is trying to solve?What is the solution (i.e., what does he mean
by “that certain je ne scai-quoi”(T 1.3.9.16)?

At this point, Hume believes
that he has fully explained causal inference.He is ready to return to the question of the source of the idea of
necessary connection.